Skip to main content

About your Search

20121224
20130101
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 60 (some duplicates have been removed)
of bicycle lanes and existing rights of way. i can't imagine being clearer than that. what i don't understand is just, again, how are you proposing we get around what is clearly stated statutory if that is the question. >> the preamble says minor alteration. in both exemptions, they have to be a minor alteration, and bike lane is listed as one of the examples of a type of minor alteration. but just because it's a bike lane doesn't therefore mean it's a minor alteration. it's a two-pronged -- basically the criteria it's got to be a minor alteration and then bike lane is listed as one of the possible types of minor alteration. but that doesn't mean every bike lane is a minor alteration. that was the -- as i understand it, that was the argument that the city made on the big bike plan and they got slapped down by the dort when they made -- court when they made that argument. >> president chiu: if i could respond to that the code refers to what is described as quote minor alterations for example new -- landscape, filling of earth and then it lists a number of minor alterations of land. again, coll
: thank you. >> about the categorical exemptions. >> president chiu: thank you. why don't we continue and continue the clock as well. >> howard shaf ner president speaking to the nuts and bolts that supervisor wiener asked about, first of all, in our briefing i think we've dealt with that quite a bit, and also briefing from our council. but first of all, you can't have categorical exemption when there's cumulative impact with another project and that would be the case with the masonic -- project. the planning department itself sis in their brief the cumulative impact is the streets and their vicinity affected by the project. masonic is the major north-south thoroughfare and fell and oak are the major east-west thoroughfares. masonic has 32,000 motor vehicles a day it's a few blocks from baker street. in fact, they were going to remove a bus stop on central, which is only one block from masonic. the masonic project would remove all street parking on both sides of masonic for over half a mile including through fell street around 171 parking spaces reduce travel lanes on masonic during m
that. mr. fried, ms. miller do you want to add anything to that? okay. why don't we open it up to public comment. >> good afternoon again commissioners. eric brook representing san francisco green party and the local organization our city. first a technical point on all of this. i was under the impression and check with dhr on this that the executive position still exists but filled on an interim basis. maybe i am wrong on that but good to make sure you're correct on that from the staff's perspective. i agree bringing it back in house because the next year is going to be really big for clean power sf and some other things and we need somebody that can be available five days a week, 50 weeks a year. i mean that's really going to be important, but the main thing i want to focus on is that the advocates for clean power sf have had some concerns with the way that lafco -- when we originally set set up lafco to work on clean power sf and especially get at the beginning of 2007 and what we needed from lafco and i believe the intention we needed somebody on task for clean power s
energy and policy if we don't know where we're starting from so we need to benchmark as a city and need property owners to know what their energy use and patterns are within their own property. the second one is to encourage local renewable energy and dg distributed generation and don't need to build new transition needs and local security and keep the dollars in the local economy and to help with us there are a number of recommendations and they're tinkering around the edge of our regulatory process and rules but ultimately we want to work together to drive comprehensive energy policy to support renewables and continue to take the lead on streamlining the processes and working with neighboring jurisdictions to do that as well so we have a standard system bay area wide and include this for local renewals and work with pg&e and we have a robust electric grid downtown and precludes installing renewable energy there and work with the homeowners so they know the options and how to finance it -- >> chair campos. >> commissioner mab. >> can i ask danielle? can you say more about explore and
in the next year i would be surprised if we don't have to deal with the broad band network and i don't know what you have experienced but a month ago comcox raised my rate 15 bucks a month and just like we need public power, we need public communications. we need to be competing with a public infrastructure with compast, comcast and at&t and you name it and i urge that we do something in the next year and do a new study around broad band and 110 years ago now. we need. >> >> update it and lay the ground for a communication system in san francisco and if you look at what happens with the public access channel it's obvious that we need it and comcast isn't going to give us the access content and opportunities for the community that we really need so please do. i know you have a long list but please add that to the list. thanks. >> thank you. anyone else? okay. seeing none public comment is closed, so what i would say -- i would direct staff to work with me and drafting a res diewgz that we would bring to the commission at our next meeting that outlines all of these issues and makes some
it inevitably going to fail. if you don't have somebody speaking that understands the policy how it inevitably will fail, must fail. it's designed to fail. if you don't have somebody that understands that concept in the position then you're just going to be walking down the road to inevitably throwing money at a policy that will fail, so would urge when looking for somebody ask them questions about what policy they understand because most people in this town, and the media do not know that germany is approaching 100% renewable energy and there is already a nation that is 100% solar and the cca plan is just failure. designed to fail, so if you're not aware of that, if you never heard that before you should talk to somebody who knows and there's people who have written books on this how this policy must fail. it's just scientifically designed upside down and backwards. it can't possibly succeed but san francisco needs because we're a leadership town we need a policy that will win. the mayor talked to the mayor of freeberg germany who has a policy and we think we should talk to them over the
. this was indirectly mentioned in the guardian editorial but they don't say it and it's because they don't understand it. it's important to understand what being done in germany and other countries around the world because by doing this they're creating a massive cash flow to homeowners in these countries and it's an investment that the homeowners are glad to take the money out of equity and buy panels with. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. next speaker. seeing none public comment is closed. colleagues this is just a discussion item. mr. . fried. >> i wanted to thank danielle for the work that she did. there were two co-chairs one left the city family and got another job and she tooked over the work herself and even though i have criticisms i want to acknowledge she did an excellent job getting this through the process it went through and there were a lot of ideas that people had. there were other stuff want in the report and nothing to do with renewable energy generation and it could be used by the in the future and i wanted to acknowledge that. >> thank you mr. fried and we do ac
you have done. >> supervisor kim, i also want to add a few words for myself. fee i don't evenna you [spelling?] you main annoy you are the first asian america supervisor that i got know when i was a community activist and i appreciate your words of wisdom done and encouragement for all of the work that we do here and i also want to take a moment to colleagues remind you that you started the conversation around reforms year ago and conducted many meetings and trying to reform the jeopardia and the biz tax that we reformed just this last november and i remember having conversation with you about that before i joined this board in the small business commission and thank you for putting that idea in my head. i know that you have had tremendous service in sacrament toe and i hope and believe that you will continue to public service in years to come and hope to work pa with you in that capacity and i want to thank you on my behalf. >> thank you very much we are so happen to be here to acknowledge all of the work that you have done and i have to say in our own distribution, fee i don't
and maimed and severely impaired by drunk drivers. i don't want to have to go home and have the honor and pleasure instead of hearing kids play soccer hear screams of kids getting run over by drunk drivers. i request you think about the proposed restaurant that's being put in there. it's only benefiting one person and that's the developer. thank you. >> president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> good evening, board of supervisors. let me start off by saying that was not a disrespect to you all, in terms of making a comment on the last session. as i read it within the agenda -- >> president chiu: excuse me, you've already spoken in public comment. we started general public comment before this session. you did speak in that session. >> no i haven't. >> president chiu: my apologies. >> anyway, i apologize for stepping into a comment in which i thought it was okay per the agenda, okay, so i can comment on any which thing that's brought up before the board. but we're just here to speak on the issue of the sf mta. and the issues surrounding the sf mta, the budget, how everything's going ov
. mr. elsbernd brung up prop g but did it affect anything? i don't know. we have to look at those numbers today because in two weeks they're talking about cutting service to your constituents in the outer neighborhoods. yet take care of the visitors that's coming to shop in union square but what about the individuals in the outer neighborhoods. service is going to be affected deeply with these cuts. so we just ask for you and we are trying to work with the agency as a partnership, what we're asking for the support of the board as well. let's really identify the serious problems of the agency, and the bureaucratic -- the misspending of all the funds that they have. can we do that. and we're willing to work with each and every one of you as -- >> president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> like alfred hitchcock said, good evening. first i would like to thank supervisor olague, in my opinion her crowning achievement is that she set an example for all the school kids in san francisco. don't tolerate bullying, even in the city and county of san francisco, ie the mayor's office doing al
to the service cut and i don't think it follows the tenants of the traffic first quality to keep the level of service per the 1996 levels. also the budget includes funding to have a regular service schedule before and after the holiday. that was passed by this board and approved and we don't know why mta feels it's their prerogative to cut that service that has already been budgeted. we are a new union administration this year. we've tried to have a non-adversarial relationship with mta and have carried forth the philosophy of public service to the visitors and riders in san francisco but we seem to have a hard time joining minds or sharing philosophy of service first at the tim to the public. we bring this issue to you so you can be abreast of it and we are sure the agency hasn't notified you and we are 14 short days away from this time period and we don't know if there's been public outreach. we don't want our brothers and sisters of this city to be left out in the lurch where they don't have ability to use the transportation system for this period of time. >> president chiu: thank you v
impact. and we don't care, we carry that only for our swat officers and so forth. so they do have that and they also are having the discussions about looking at tasers, what we are looking at is if you look at every tool that i have on my gun belt, do you see a very lethal tool in the sense of a firearm. everything else is about paying compliance. you are dealing with a person in crisis, and pain is often times and you compliment that crisis with substance abuse through alcohol or otherwise, and you have diminished pain reception. even dealing with folks who have a history of mental illness, there is a reduced pain perception in many instances. with that being said, do i want to use weapons that are only about pain compliance or use a weapon system that is about controlling and stopping that person from doing any further aggressive behavior than what they are doing and our policy is if you look at the policy. it is not about using the policy against someone who is simply non-compliant. that would be a violation of the policy. it is about using potentially that weapon system agains
and number three i don't think the staff is naive and to suggest that is inappropriate. they have been working very hard in this effort -- >> i -- >> i'm not talking about you. i am talking general in response. i believe the process is organic and i believe they do take into consideration every input as possible and this process and i know the chair and the other members of the commission know is not over yet. it is still evolving and that is an important element to put out there. this process is still evolving and organ and i can need continued input to whatever surveys and approaches we take are reflective of those issues and the other issue raised is san franciscans should be doing outreach in this support and i can't support that more than enough because it's always my experience that sometimes we bring in outside forces -- not that we have here, but outside forces that don't know the community, communities of color and speak other languages and in addition to english and those are sensitive issues i think the staff has taken into consideration and that's an important statement
. and for those of who don't have a copy. and this is motion and seconded. >> if in favor aye. >> aye. >> passed. >> item 12, approve the selection of utility systems efficiencies and authorize the manager to negotiate and execute a professional services agreement for $2 million and not to exceed five years. >> this is straightforward for hetch hetchy water, i am happy to answering any questions. >> i will move the item. >> second. >> any public comment? seeing none. those in favor, say aye. >> aye. >> motion carries. >> item 13, approve amendment no. 4 to agreement cs-854, engineering services for sutro reservoir. >> the last two items are straightforward. i don't have a formal presentation. >> move. >> seconded. >> the item is moved and seconded. any public comment? seeing none. public comment is closed. all in favor signify by aye. >> aye. >> the motion carries. next item. >> item 14, accept work performed by pcl civil constructors for contract db-1116, decreasing the total amount of $87,582,124 and extend the contract. >> what is your pleasure? >> so moved. >> seconded. >> the item moved and
to control it if there is something going awry. >> why don't we go to the budget analyst report. >> [speaker not understood] reported under the proposed ordinance, the initial mitigation agreement between north star solar and puc would be for $2.9 million for a procurement of transmission capacity. however, the budget they gave us is actually for higher than that. it is about 2.9 68 million. although they didn't have any kind of detailed expenditure plan. so, we are recommending a budget and finance committee reserve on those funds pending budget details. * i believe they concur with. the second recommendation was this would in fact proactively approve 35 future such mitigation agreements, total of expenditures up to 28.3 million, with no further board of supervisors oversight. we do consider that to be a policy matter. we further recommended that expenditures, appropriations of more than 400,000 come back to the budget and finance committee and to the board of supervisors for approval, but this is just discretion the puc is offering an alternative proposal. >> and then to the puc. generally
're living in a time -- crisis this is a time when we need bold action. we don't need two and a half years of looking at six blocks on fell and oak. we have other cities laughing at us, chicago, minneapolis, portland, new york. i encourage you to reject the appeal. thank you. >> president chiu: walter, his you've already participated in this public comment. no, you can't, actually. thank you. are there any other members of the public that wish to speak in public comment on behalf of the project sponsor? okay. why don't we invite back the appellants for up to three minutes for their rebuttal. >> good evening, mark brennan. mta and mea have not demonstrated class 1 or a categorical exemption exists. there is no bike lane that currently exists. the changes are not minor alterations because onstreet parking will be removed, concrete plantares and buffers added and a commute lane added -- during commute hours. in order to rely on a categorical exemption agency must provide substantial echedz thaevidence that the project is within the exempt category. they have not conducted a transit analysis t
don't approve people, but we actually have somewhat of a process to say that we did look through the range of applicants to be able to understand the type of position we want to have in the position ideally and how to move on there from. >> commissioner mar. >> thank you. i just wanted to say i appreciate ms. miller's work over the years, but i'm in agreement with our chair, supervisor campos, it will bring us significant cost savings but really an ability for lafco to be more than it is right now and i appreciate working with jason fried as well and i hope he applies for that position and i hear what supervisor avalos is saying and it makes sense. >> colleagues, any other comments? questions? commissioner olague. >> now, i was just going to comment and if i missed my opportunity to comment on potential items -- is this the time? >> yes. >> well, i wanted to mention that i'm not sure if there are other examples of it, or how to even approach this, but in san francisco i guess there are few commissions that are still picked partly my the payor and partly by the board of supervis
in this neighborhood and people who just move throughout the city have said that these streets don't feel safe, they don't feel comfortable, please do something about it. and it took a while and it took some momentum to get us going but we finally did it. we finally brought the community together and we worked over nine months with a variety of stakeholders, local stakeholders, people throughout the city. and we came up with a plan. and that plan went before the mta board. they considered the policy merits of it and decided to pass it unanimously on october 16. again, i just wanted to emphasize because i think it's so important that we were able to engage so many people throughout the community and to come up with a plan that was balanced. and we considered several options. we considered removing a lane of traffic on oak street but oak street is very important for vehicle traffic and people throughout the city, in the western neighborhoods and as well in the eastern neighborhoods who use this street to access, you know, 19th avenue to get to the golden gate bridge or octavia to the 101 that it
-life threatening i don't know that we have that here. we are talking about a doctor saying that you need to have this instrument available in terms of liability. i think that we probably would have a baig issue of liability if that was not available. and so, so there is... it is not like we are replacing a gun with something that is not non-lethal, really. potentially. it is potentially could be lethal and so that to me, the fact that you have to have this instrument tells you, the danger, here. thank you. >> commissioner, supervisor olague? >> i guess, i think that you really gave the argument of why it is so important to really encourage and continue to strengthen the cit program because you know, definitely, i think that that is why resources should go. rather than train 103 people and having to invest in that additional weaponry even though it is supposed to be donated there are things that we have to pay for. then, i think that those resources should be definitely going into a different conversation around american tal health crisis and i think that is what distubers me the most. how we str
bring in outside forces -- not that we have here, but outside forces that don't know the community, communities of color and speak other languages and in addition to english and those are sensitive issues i think the staff has taken into consideration and that's an important statement to make. i appreciate your comments and i read your letter and i appreciate the comments but i think it's important to keep within the context of how the staff and commission has operated and quite frankly how members of the board of supervisors has operated with the best of intentions because at the end of the day we're accountable to the tax payers and the rate payers of city and county of san francisco. >> thank you president torres. just a clarification on the action item before us if there is one or for the later meet something. >> the sfpuc commission agenda provides for them to discuss and take action, so our understanding is that the commission secretary would call the roll for the sfpuc so that they could vote on this agenda item for lafco it was just a discussion item. >> thank you. commis
got it -- you have got a city subway particular to ride you got a ticket to ride and ... i don't know why you are riding so light rail. you will do right you will do right city by me and before you get to say good-bye i hope i got a city that is free. you got a ticket to ride and the city is there my city do care yeah .... >> do any other members of public wish to speak or sing with regards to these resolutions? all right seeing none, at this time, we will hear from property owners either of whom if you wish to take up to 15 minutes with reds louis pertaining to their property let me see if their any property owners here who wish to speak on behalf of their property and if you can identify your name and the property you are representing. >> my name is mark and i represent the owners of one 12 stock ton street and 212 strobing ton street. i request that the board deny the resolutions at least with respect to these two properties resolutions one nine one 090 and one nine one 094 and pertaining to one two stock ton stories and two one two stock stonn stories this is the apple fl
a little bit rushed. supervisor wiener, i don't think that's the normal standard of, from what i've seen working with dpw >> what i would say is the sponsor of the legislation is not here and neither is supervisor campos. my inclination would be, i would want them to weigh in on this, so my inclination would be to forward it to the board where they will be, they will always have the option to continue it or to send it back to committee. if they were here now we could ask them that, but that would be, that's one option that we would pursue. >> that's to forward to the board without recommendation. >> yeah, i could agree with that. i also want to go on record, our office spoke with supervisor campos who was in favor of this particular project but it's probably better that we hear it from him as opposed to me as a third party, third person, so i support that motion. >> so sounds like there's a motion to forward without objection. is there any objection to that? >> mr. chair, as a committee report for tomorrow? >> as a committee report for the december 11, 2012 meeting. without objection
away. that's 10.3 on our agenda. we don't need a staff report. remind that you this board -- the policy we have, we are doing this because the money has been found through the mta and through supervisor campos' leadership. so, with that let me ask supervisor campos to come and join us, please. >> all right. let me read it into the record. item 10.3, authorizing the director to accept and expend $6.7 million in fy 2013 transit sustainability project funding from the mtc, to be used for the free muni for low income youth program and the light rail vehicle rehabilitation project from the mtc to be used for the free muni for low-income youth program and the light rail vehicle rehabilitation project. >> supervisor, good afternoon. welcome. >> good afternoon, mr. president. , commissioners. thank you very much for giving me this opportunity to address you today. and if i may, i'd like to begin by asking all of the community members who are here to speak in support, to be here in support of free muni for low-income youth to please stand * so that you can see them. >> good work. >> thank you v
. and also, to thank the staff, the people who don't appear before you very often for doing the work over the years that has made the authority the effective and nationally recognized organization that it is today, professional organization that the church has referred to. and i would like to dedicate this last report to them. and i would like to wish the board good luck and god speed in fearing the san francisco transportation authority into many successful years and cutting edge work in the future, so thank you all. and now, for the actual substance of the report, a few things that i would like to announce, the first one is that the american road and transportation builders association and its 24th meeting in washington, d.c. gave the city and parkway the project of the year award as or because of the outstanding contributions to the advancement of public, private partnerships. and we all need to be aware of and proud of. the project was the first public partnership in the state of california, based on availability payments. in a way it was a leap of faith for the folks approving the pr
after the hearings that you held. >> i have to go back and check. i don't know if we did or not and for that i apologize. >> there's a question from supervisor cohen. >> one of the speakers raised a request for a speed bump near his residence. i was wondering if dpw -- not dpw, it's mta that usually does traffic calming evaluations, is that correct? >> that is correct, supervisor. >> do you guys ever work in coordination with each other? >> yes, normally on something like this it would be reviewed by the mta and we would work with them to find the appropriate permitting to issue. we have to figure out in this case whether it was something that's going to be requested from mta or through the project sponsor. >> so i guess to the neighbor, i don't know if you -- did you request speed bumps or some kind of evaluation through mta? no, no, i'm not worried about them, the agency that actually does the evaluation, puts in the speed bumps, is mta, the metropolitan transportation authority. my question is did you apply for a speed bump through that program or a traffic calming
tiff if they don't want to be exposed to the second hand smoke. and supervisor mar, i think you talked a little bit about the 2006 surgeon general's report. one thick that was in the report, even short term exposure can be dangerous to cardiovascular health. in addition to sending out letters to the building land lords and managers what our department plans to do is to do two mailings because there will be first the apartment owners with 50 or less units who will be phased in as the first phase, so we'll do a mailing to notify those owners and then subsequently on second mailing to inform the other apartment owners of the larger units and we also plan to have a web site with questions and answers and provide technical assistance. so in this way we can increase the land lords' awareness and education and really continue to have a dialogue about second hand smoke in multi unit housing. >> thank you so much for all the great work on this. so, colleagues, if there are no other questions, let's open this up for public comment. we have a number of tenant reps but also speakers from the apar
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 60 (some duplicates have been removed)